在〈朱子陽明的格物致知說和他們整個思想的關係〉中，戴君仁表示此文的機緣之一者，即是呼應唐君毅先生在《清華學報》所發表的〈大學章句辨證及格物致知思想之發展〉。然而在戴文中，僅徵引了唐文的結論，卻未進一步辨析其異。戴、唐分別為當代經學與哲學領域的奠基者。二者在相同議題中的見解異同，本就可形成一項十分值得探析的研究。二先生在此議題所未盡的發展，更是可供後續研究者可努力的目標。
基於此，本文在研究步驟上共分四項環節：首先，本文先扼要的勾勒戴文對陽明格物致知說之省察。其次，則探究戴文如何辨析陽明評朱子象山說格物之失。再者，本文以戴氏的論點為主軸，由此對照唐氏之論點，並對比二者論陽明格物致知說之異同。最後，重新反思戴唐在「所見略同」處的儒學意義。

In The Relationship between Zhuzi and Wang Yangming: On “The Investigation of Things and the Extension of Knowledge”(gewu zhizhi, 格物致知) and Their Holistic Thoughts, Dai Junren stated that one of his motivations for writing the article was to respond to The Debate on the Annotation of the Great Learning(da xue, 大學) and the Development of the Thoughts on the Investigation of Things and the Extension of Knowledge published by Tang Junyi in the Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies. However, aside from a mere mention of Tang’s conclusion, the article included no further investigation. Both renowned for their significance in pioneering contemporary studies of Confucian classics and philosophy, Dai and Tang demonstrate in triguing differences and similaritiesin their respective arguments on Wang Yangming’s philosophy. This paper therefore regards this incomplete attempt and gap in the literature as worthy of exploration on its own and as a direction for future studies.
The research procedure of this paper is divided in to four sections as follows. First, an outline of the review is presented, concerning the thoughts on gewu zhizhi observed in Dai’s article. Second, this study investigated how Dai analyzed the flaws inYangming’s criticism of the theories of Zhuzi and Lu Xiangshan on gewu. Moreover, this study compared Dai’s argument with that of Tang and specifically analyzed the differences and similarities in their perspectives on gewu zhizhi. Finally, this paper concludes with are thinking of the implications of similarities in their perspectives in the field of Confucian studies.